Not all that glitters is gold. The same adage can be applied to laser weapons - the Holy Graal of modern warfare. I've found interesting comments on the subject on Wired Defense [>] website's pages.
Army Moves Ahead With Mobile Laser Cannon
By Noah Shachtman
August 19, 2008
Picture (click to enlarge): Under the High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator (HEL TD) Phase II contract, awarded Aug. 15, Boeing will complete the design of, then build, test and evaluate, a rugged beam control system on a Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck. Boeing also will develop the system-engineering requirements for the entire HEL TD laser weapon system.
Introduction: (quotes)
The Army is moving ahead with plans to mount a laser cannon on a massive, 35-ton-plus truck. The service just handed Boeing a $36 million contract to "continue developing a truck-mounted, high-energy laser weapon system that will destroy rockets, artillery shells and mortar rounds," according to a company statement.
Low power demonstrations are scheduled for 2010, with battlefield-strength laser tests to follow in 2013.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Oshkosh Defense [>]. Built to stand up to the evolving challenges in the field, the HEMTT A4 hits the battlefield with significant improvements and advancements in power, maintenance, and soldier safety. With a new 500 hp engine the next-generation HEMTT is faster and stronger than ever. Major changes and additions to the cab allow for greater soldier comfort and superior safety with the most up-to-date integrated attachments for armor and under-cab protection. The climate is always changing. So should the vehicles that are depended on to move troops and supplies where the mission demands. Ensure mission success with the HEMTT A4 family of vehicles.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Defense Update's Oshkosh to Begin Production of 1700+ heavy Trucks [>]. A quote - "The U.S. Army is increasing the number of 8x8 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks (HEMTT) it is ordering from Oshkosh, adding $321 million to a contract awarded in early February 2008. The contract modification is funding a total production lot of 1,745 HEMTT A4 heavy trucks. (...) HEMTT A4 is powered by a 500-HP Caterpillar C-15 engine. This engine provides 55hp more than the original engine used in the HEMTT. The engine is coupled with an Allison 4500 SP/5-speed automatic transmission, rated for 600hp. (...) HEMTT A4 will be produced in several models, including the M997A4 cargo truck, the M-978A4 fuel servicing truck (tanker), the M1120A4 load handling system variant, M-982 A4 and M-983 A4 tractors, and M-984 A4 recovery truck fitted with cranes and winches."
Picture (click to enlarge): From Defense Industry Daily's $272.7M to Oshkosh for FHTV Heavy Trucks [>]. A quote - "Oshkosh has also introduced HEMTT A4 as the latest improvement to the HEMTT line, and a HEMTT A3 hybrid with diesel-electric power. A March 6/08 corporate release adds that this recent order adds 1,084 heavy expanded mobility tactical trucks (HEMTT) in the A4 configuration, raising the total number of ordered HEMTT A4s to 1,745 and the total contract modification to more than $321 million. Oshkosh celebrated the delivery of the 20,000th HEMTT truck on Feb 14/08, and HEMTT A4 production will begin in July 2008."
Picture (click to enlarge): From A Korean Website [>]. A quote - "HEMTT trucks exist in several configurations:
M977 and M985 cargo trucks carry all types of equipment, especially ammunition. A crane is mounted at the rear of the vehicle.
M978 tanker refuels tactical vehicles and helicopters in forward locations.
M983 tractor tows the trailer-mounted MIM-104 Patriot missile systems.
M983 with 30 KW generator and a crane mounted behind the cab towed the MGM-31 Pershing Erector Laucher in CONUS (a MAN tractor was used in West Germany).
M984 recovery vehicle uses a lift-and-tow system to recover disabled vehicles in two-to-three minutes. It mounts a recovery winch, a crane and a large storage box.
The cost of a 'plain' HEMTT (M977 or M985) begins at approximately $135,000."
Picture (click to enlarge): From A Korean Website [>]. A quote - "Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT) series are a range of 8x8 diesel powered off-road capable trucks, used by the US military. Formally described as "Truck, Cargo: 10-Ton, 8x8", it has been nicknamed the "Dragon Wagon". HEMTT trucks first went into service with the U.S. Army in 1982, as a replacement for the M520 Goer." A 10x10 variant of the HEMTT truck is used as prime mover in the Palletized Load System (PLS). The vehicle is produced by the Oshkosh Truck Corporation. In the civilian realm the truck's chassis is also used in airport firefighting vehicles.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Laser Weapons - HEL TD [>].
Picture (click to enlarge): From Mobile tactical high energy laser weapon system and method for generating a high energy laser beam [>]. A quote - "A laser weapon system using a high energy deuterium fluoride (DF) or hydrogen fluoride (HF) laser, for which all necessary reactants and other materials are carried on an easily movable vehicle. Reactant gases are stored mixed with a diluent gas, such as helium, for ease of handling and to provide nearly ideal gas behavior. Cooling water for the laser is also employed in a high pressure steam generator that uses diesel fuel and oxygen to produce heat. Apart from a fluorine generator, the system uses only four storage tanks for reactant gases."
Picture (click to enlarge): From Science and Technology Review's [>] Bright Future for Tactical Laser Weapons [>]. A life-size model, developed by General Atomics and PEI Electronics, of a mobile 100-kilowatt heat-capacity laser built on a prototype of a hybrid-electric, high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (Humvee) shows the potential compactness of a full-power weapon system.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Defense Update's Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser (MTHEL) [>]. A quote - "MTHEL uses directed energy (laser beam) to intercept aerial targets such as rockets, missiles, artillery shells and other aerial threats. The target destruction is achieved by projecting a highly focused, high-power laser beam, delivered by a chemical laser, with enough energy to affect the target, and explode it in midair. This operational concept is offering the first "reusable" interception element. Existing interceptors use kinetic energy kill vehicles (such as fragmentation warheads), which are not reusable." (NSM - cancelled project).
Picture (click to enlarge): From Defense Update's Skyguard [>]. A quote - "Northrop Grumman is proposing a derivative of its high power chemical laser system to be used as a ground based interceptor of man-portable anti-aircraft missiles which could be used by terrorists trying to hit passenger aircraft. The new system, called Skyguard will use the high-energy chemical laser known as THEL, designed to protect against rocket, artillery and mortar (RAM) threats. Benefiting from significant technological advancements, Skyguard has higher power than heritage systems and a larger beam, making it a much more capable system, the company said."
Weapons-Grade Lasers by the End of '08?
By Noah Shachtman
September 02, 2008
Picture (click to enlarge): Cross-section of a laser beam (on monitor screen).
Introduction: (quotes)
Defense contractor Northrop Grumman is promising the Pentagon that it'll have weapons-grade electric lasers by the end of 2008. Which means honest-to-goodness energy weapons might actually become a military reality, after decades of fruitless searching.
Main themes: (quotes)
Northrop's system combines a bunch of smaller lasers into a bigger one -- Death Star-style, sorta. In March, the company announced that it had completed the first of these eight "laser chains." Yesterday, the company said it had joined two of the chains together. What's more, the beam combo ran at peak power -- 30 kW -- "for more than five minutes continuously and more than 40 minutes total; and achieved electrical-to-optical efficiency of greater than 19 percent."
"We are completely confident we will meet the 100 kW of power level and associated beam quality and runtime requirements of the JHPSSL Phase 3 program by the end of December, 2008," Bob Bishop, a Northrop Grumman spokesman, tells Defense Daily.
And it's not the only energy weapon project that's making progress. The Army just gave Boeing a $36 million contract to develop a laser-firing truck.
NSM remarks:
Now, it's time for sensible and sobering comments.
Other excerpts:
Hahaha. 19% efficiency, What are they going to do? Drag along a nuclear power plant on a big cart wherever they go? I'm sure this will be ready just in time for the robot revolution, the moon colonies, the space elevators, and "The Grand Theory of Everything," and finally proof that God doesn't exist. Posted by: jethro | Sep 2, 2008 2:34:26 PM
(...) 19% is pretty good efficiency. Note that the internal combustion engine, a system known for around 100 years yields similar efficiency of converting thermal to mechanical energy. Also, I do not think that normal bullet extracts more than 30% of energy in the cartridge. Lot's of energy is wasted as heat. Posted by: stoffer | Sep 2, 2008 3:00:37 PM
(...) "With that much energy, lasers should be able to knock mortars and rockets out of the sky", mortar BOMBS and rockets, Btw, lasers won't do shit against insensitive munitions and munitions that were designed to keep the heat away from the explosive filling. Posted by: Sven Ortmann | Sep 2, 2008 1:40:10 PM
(...) "actually Sven, the ones they plan to finally develop and put into action will, were talking some highpowered stuff here man this isnt a highschool science experiment Posted by: Lee | Sep 2, 2008 2:15:57 PM"
I didn't write about high school experiments. I wrote about insensitive munitions and heat-dissipating coatings. Check about insensitive munitions; you can throw them into a hot fire and the explosive burns rather slowly instead of explodes. Which means that it wouldn't be burned till impact and still explode when the fuze initiates the explosion. And that's already the worst case for the munition.
Heat dissipating coating would slightly reduce munitions efficiency, but the coating could consume the heat by being destroyed instead of absorption and transfer of heat to the explosive. The coating would be gone, the munition would still do its job.
Finally, it's necessary to detect and track the munition. A dedicated opponent could tailor a saboted polygonal mortar bomb or rocket that cannot be easily detected and tracked by a counter-mortar radar. That costs a little bit efficiency, too. It's a very common scheme that advances in defense trigger advances in offense. To trust a wonder weapon means to ignore military history. Posted by: Sven Ortmann | Sep 2, 2008 3:13:21 PM
(...) On the subject of lasers, what is to stop an opponent from finishing their missiles with a mirror coating, or even better an array of tiny corner reflectors to send the beam right back to where it came from? The other issue is the one that has dogged missile defence ever since Reagan’s SDI, the use of hundreds of decoys would swamp any missile defence system rendering it useless. In fact a missile defence system is almost useless as a defensive weapon against a large enemy, its only tactical use is to defeat an opponents remaining stock after a pre-emptive strike to knock out most of their capacity. So far from being a defensive weapon, this actually increases the possibility of a major war because with this the generals would see that they have a good chance of winning a conflict if they fire the first shots. Posted by: Dave O. | Sep 3, 2008 5:15:54 AM
(...) @Bor: "Do you seriously, honestly think "sending the beam right back where it came from" is even remotely feasible. No offence but it's an utterly silly suggestion" Actually its not that silly. Ever think about how a bicycle reflector works? It uses a grid of 'cube-corner' reflectors that end up directing a large amount of the incoming light back along its inbound path regardless of the angle of incidence. Obviously you wouldn't have the same wattage being reflected back but it would probably be enough to blind any optics being used. Posted by: Chris | Sep 3, 2008 7:28:39 AM
(...) "Do you seriously, honestly think "sending the beam right back where it came from" is even remotely feasible". Several of the Apollo missions left a reflector on the moon that does just that. I suggest you find out about "corner reflectors" for that is exactly what they do. (let’s make it easy for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corner_reflector [>]). You are also wrong about pre-emptive strikes being out of the question because of Subs. A Sub can only carry a few warheads with little room for decoys so if a foe only has those left it would be possible to knock them out of the sky with a system like this as your pre-emptive strike eliminated most of the ground based decoy systems. A laser system might work against the smaller missile but so does the existing Patriot missile defence system, and none of them are any good against the real threat of a nuclear bomb in a lorry or large suitcase delivered by hand which is a more likely scenario. Don’t get me wrong, this research is worth doing. All I think is that they should be a bit more honest about the intentions and probable usage of any laser “defence” system. Posted by: Dave O. | Sep 3, 2008 7:37:22 AM
(...) @Sven: IIRC, the alternate defeat mechanism is called "pulsed impulsive kill", "pulsed energy projectile", or "inverse Brehmsstrahlung". You can't just put a mirror or reflector on the target to defeat the laser; the reflector would just abet the pulsed formation of a plasma event on the target's surface. Some sort of ablative/reflective coating might inhibit the formation of a plasma bubble, but there would still be a kinetic effect.
WADR, some of you folks seem to think the only kill mechanism is heat transfer, like you're running alongside the target with a hair dryer, warming it up. IIRC, it's more like you're smacking the target with a cross between a sledgehammer, and an arc welder.
The problem here is that directed energy weapons work at speeds and scales that are inconsistent with our everyday experience and intuitions. It's hard to grasp the power and effects at issue. We're not talking about the incoherent, diffuse warmth of the sun on your face; we're talking about coherent, focused, pulsed energy. It's outside the realm of ordinary experience. If you're even going to imagine it, you have to do some work. Look at it this way: a 5.56 NATO projectile delivers around 1500 joules at around 900 meters per second. A laser pulse delivering the same 1500 J would do it at 300 MILLION meters per second. If the target couldn't take a hit point blank from a 5.56 NATO projectile, you can't expect it to take the same hit from an energy projectile moving over 300 thousand times faster. Does that help? Posted by: demophilus | Sep 3, 2008 11:34:02 AM
(...) 19% efficiency means that to hit a target with the equivalent of 100 lbs. of high explosive you have to dissipate the equivalent of 400 lbs. in your weapon itself (assuming 100% transmission efficiency, so make that more like 800 lbs.). So a laser can be useful only against targets that for some reasons can't be hardened as much as the (big, fragile) laser itself. Yes, rifles may not be much more efficient at transferring energy to bullets, which is why body armor works so well. Light weapons are useful only against soft targets. It takes a big, heavy gun mounted on a heavy vehicle to penetrate a heavily armored vehicle, and even then it is hard to defeat reactive armor and DU armor plate.
In general, whatever combination of active cooling and reflective coatings are used in the laser's own beamline optics will make plenty good armor against the beam. And of course, the laser is useless in fog, rain or smoke. These points are fundamental and not subject to alteration by any future technology. At best, the laser could be a niche weapon against soft targets, but as other posters have pointed out, missiles and mortar rounds can be hardened well enough. In practice, the laser will be too delicate and unwieldy, and its vulnerability to simple countermeasures and bad weather will continue to exclude it from actual use. Posted by: Mark Gubrud | Sep 4, 2008 7:20:48 AM
(...) In practice, the laser will be too delicate and unwieldy, @Mark Gubrud: Based off of what? This isn't one system. Your analysis falls flat. BTW, There are plenty of clear days when one could strike, and fog won't have the same effect fiber lasers. Also the system hasn't been ramped up to full capacity, or full Wattage yet. Posted by: Philopoemen | Sep 4, 2008 8:36:03 AM
NSM remarks:
That laser beam does not have to explode the target was utilized in "IED destroyers".
Thor – High Energy Laser IED Neutralization System
Defense Update
Updated: 05/25/2006
Picture (click to enlarge): THOR - RAFAEL, Israel
Introduction: (quotes)
RAFAEL is introducing at Eurosatory a new high-energy laser weapon system, developed in Israel to defeat improvised explosive charges (IEDs), roadside bombs and unexploded ordnance (UXO) and other objects categorized "potentially explosive hazards". The vehicular, system is mounted on a remotely controlled weapon station, carrying the laser beam director and high-energy laser and coaxial 12.7mm machine gun to neutralize improvised explosive devices from a safe, standoff distance. This dual capability enables Thor to be used for offensive and defensive purposes, as well as for safe stand-off removal of explosive obstacles by laser directed energy or projectile kinetic energy. Since the laser is used to burn the IED, rather than activate it, it can be used to avoid collateral damage which can result from other neutralization procedures.
Picture (click to enlarge): The directed energy from the laser is capable of rapidly clearing unexploded ordnance and defeating IEDs by inducing a low-order burning or deflagration reaction in the explosive fill at safe stand-off ranges (see photos above). THOR uses powerful, air cooled laser, measuring up to 700 watt. The kinetic energy from the 12.7mm bullet fired by the M2 functions as a standoff disrupter, destroying fusing, thick-cased munitions and booby traps. The M2 machine gun also provides accurate, direct fire upon enemy forces and targets in either an offensive or defensive role.
Laser weapons: A distant target
Posted by Jonathan Skillings
August 23, 2008
Picture (click to enlarge): The work on the HEL TD is intended to lead eventually to a truck-mounted laser weapon that could shoot down rockets and artillery shells. (Credit: Boeing)
Introduction: (quotes)
Laser technology may yet yield the weapons of the not-so-distant future, but the future is certainly not now. For the moment, it's all R&D business as usual. Earlier this week, both Boeing and Northrop Grumman put out statements about their ongoing work on U.S. Army's High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator, or HEL TD. And for Boeing, it was also a chance to crow about a contract win: $36 million to continue its work on a HEL TD design.
With that money, Boeing says it will first finish its design work, and then move on to building and testing a ruggedized beam control system on a heavy-duty truck (specifically, the Army's Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck). The defense contractor finished the preliminary design of the beam control system earlier this summer. Boeing also plans to develop the systems-engineering requirements for the complete HEL TD laser weapon system.
Main themes: (quotes)
But the lead times are long on projects like this. "Due to resource constraints, we are targeting somewhere in 2016 time frame for a limited deployable system," said Bill Gnacek, HEL TD program manager for the U.S. Army.
Other excerpts:
Boeing is also working on a similar project called the Laser Avenger [>]--a Humvee-mounted laser weapon system that would direct its light beam at more Earth-bound targets such as roadside bombs and other unexploded ordnance. The Laser Avenger, a variation on the existing, Stinger-missile-equipped Avenger air defense system, is internally funded by Boeing.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Laser equipped Humvee pops and fizzles IEDs [>]. A quote - "Boeing has rolled out the marketing for its laser-equipped Humvee by zapping five IED-like targets on a test range at Alabama's Redstone Arsenal (PDF) in what it called "the company's ability to rapidly respond to warfighters' needs." Dubbed the "Laser Avenger," the unit consists of a 1-kilowatt solid-state laser mounted on an air-defense Humvee. It works by "shooting an invisible beam just a few centimeters in diameter and 20 times hotter than an electric stovetop" into the offending munition until it combusts internally. It then just "pops" or "fizzles" in a low-level detonation."
Picture (click to enlarge): From Wired's Can a Puny Laser Become a Drone-Zapper? (Updated and Corrected) [>]. A quote - "Three years ago, the Army tried out a Boeing-built, Humvee-mounted laser in Iraq. By military standards, it was weak - just a single kilowatt, instead of the 100 kilowatts ordinarily considered battlefield strength. And it was quickly yanked out of the country, after some less-than-stellar attempts to zap roadside bombs. With so little power, it took forever for the laser to heat up the explosives, and set 'em off. Last year, the Army tested out an improved version of this Boeing-made system, the "Laser Avenger." The ray gun blasted away five targets, including some exploded ordnance, Boeing claimed. It took "seconds or minutes of illumination time" to "provide the thermal load necessary to detonate the targets used in the demonstration," a company spokesman said."
Russian Laser Weapons
Picture (click to enlarge): From DIA Military Art Collection - The Threat in the 1980's (Series II) [>]. Soviet Mobile Laser in Afghanistan by Edward L. Cooper, 1985. The Soviets continued a large, well-funded program to develop tactical laser weapons in the 1980s. There were reports that the USSR employed mobile laser platforms in Afghanistan against personnel, unprotected targets, and sensors.
Picture (click to enlarge): From DIA Military Art Collection - The Threat in the 1980's (Series II) [>]. Soviet Mobile Lasers Defending an Airfield by Edward L. Cooper, 1987. The Soviets built high-energy laser devices in the 1980s and generally placed more emphasis on the weapons applications of lasers than did the West. The tactical laser program had progressed to the point that by the mid-1980s, U.S. analysts anticipated that laser weapons would be deployed with future Soviet forces.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Air Power Australia's [>] High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapons's [>]chapter: Almaz-Antey High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapon. Almaz beam director optical turret mounted on a MAZ-7910 8 x 8 chassis, the turret is located on the turntable otherwise employed for the 30N6 radar.
Picture (click to enlarge): Primary optical aperture for beam director.
Picture (click to enlarge): Carbon Dioxide Gas Dynamic Laser (GDL) bank testbed. Note the hardstand used to support the MAZ-7930 chassis.
Picture (click to enlarge): From Air Power Australia's [>] High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapons's [>] A quote - "What has not been disclosed by Almaz-Antey is the progress on this project, especially in the critical area of adaptive optics and wavefront sensor technology for controlling adaptive mirrors. GDL technology is relatively mature, and derivative chemical laser designs will be largely determined by Russian capabilities in developing power modules for a given laser type. The choice of CO2 GDL may have been simply determined by its availability and low risk, as a means of demonstrating and proving other more sensitive system components. (...) The CONOPS for such a system would be similar to the US Army MTHEL system, although it is likely the Russians will pursue a fully mobile configuration, consistent with their doctrine for SAM systems (refer below). It is likely that a key role of such a DEW would be the interception of PGMs, this placing the weapon system firmly in the domain of point defence. Until we see further disclosures from the Russian MoD or Almaz-Antey, a more detailed assessment of this system is not feasible. Given the sensitivity of HEL weapon lethality performance to operating wavelength and beam quality, any predictions of achievable range performance would be at best speculative. For a system to be operationally effective, a sustained power output of the order of a MegaWatt would be required."
Picture (click to enlarge): From Air Power Australia's [>] High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapons's [>] Almaz/Beriev A-60 High Energy Laser Directed Energy Weapon Testbed (Images RuMoD via testpilot.ru). A quote - "Initiated by the Soviets as a parallel program to the US Air Force Airborne Laser Laboratory, the Almaz/Beriev A-60 program aimed to demonstrate an airborne HEL DEW capability, and provide baseline data for the development of an operational weapon. The A-60 was therefore a research testbed, even if an operational capability were to be later based on this design. Two demonstrators were built, the first flying in 1981, the second in 1991. Much of what is available from Russian open sources does not detail actual progress or achievements in this program."
Russia 'had laser cannons before U.S.'
RIA Novosti,
05/20/2008
Picture (click to enlarge):
Introduction: (quotes)
MOSCOW, May 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia started developing tactical laser weapons before the United States and has several prototypes of high-precision combat chemical lasers in its arsenal, a defense industry source said on Tuesday.
Commenting on the announcement, the Russian expert said: "We tested a similar system back in 1972. Even then our "laser cannon" was capable of hitting targets with high precision." "We have moved far ahead since then, and the U.S. has to keep pace with our research and development," he added.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment